Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Michael John Price

3 September 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Michael John PRICE (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Assault x3 and Committing an Act intended to Cause Bodily Harm.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 18^th of June 2021.

The applicant initially appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 3^rd of September 2021.  On that occasion the application was adjourned to enable a psychological assessment of him to be undertaken.  The application was ultimately hear by the Board on the 3^rd of September 2021. At that time the applicant was present at the hearing and was invited to provide any information he had in support of his application and made himself available for questioning by the Board.

Pre-parole reports prepared on behalf the Board were read to the applicant prior to his appearance at the hearing.

Statutory Criteria

In determining the application, the Board has had regard to the following statutory criteria:-

The Corrections Act 1997, s72, establishes a statutory criteria for determining suitability for parole.

S72 (4) specifically provides as follows:

“In determining whether or not a prisoner should be released on parole, the Board is to take into consideration –

• The likelihood of the prisoner re-offending; and
• The protection of the public; and
• The rehabilitation of the prisoner; and
• Any remarks made by the court in passing sentence; and
• The likelihood of the prisoner complying with the conditions; and
• The circumstances and gravity of the offence, or offences, for which the prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment; and
• The behaviour of the prisoner while in prison and, if he or she has been in a secure mental health unit, while in that secure mental health unit; and
• The behaviour of the prisoner during any previous release on parole; and
• The behaviour of the prisoner while subject to any order of a court; and
• Any reports tendered to the Board on the social background of the prisoner, the medical, psychological or psychiatric condition of the prisoner or any other matter relating to the prisoner, including in the case of a prisoner who is or has been a forensic patient any report of the Chief Forensic Psychiatrist; and
• The probable circumstances of the prisoner after release from prison; and
• Any statement provided under subsection (2B) by a victim, or, if subsection (2AB) applies, the parent or guardian of the victim, of an offence for which the prisoner has been sentenced to imprisonment; and
• If the prisoner is a sex offender prisoner, any notice or assessment given to the Board pursuant to section 31(6) or (7) concerning the prisoner's participation or non-participation in appropriate treatment; and
• Any other matters that the Board thinks are relevant.”

When considering the application for parole of a sex offender s31(3)(b) of the Act is also relevant:

• “The Director, on giving the sex offender prisoner the opportunity to participate in the appropriate treatment, is to inform the prisoner that…
• Participation, non-participation or unsatisfactory participation will, if the prisoner becomes eligible for parole, be factors taken into consideration by the Board in determining whether the prisoner should be released on parole.”

The purpose of parole:

The High Court, in Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623 rejected the proposition that the primary purpose of parole is the rehabilitation of the offender, deciding that it is "to provide for mitigation of the punishment of the prisoner in favour of his rehabilitation through conditional freedom, when appropriate, once the prisoner has served the minimum time that a judge determines justice requires that he must serve having regard to all the circumstances of his offence".

The system of parole does recognise, however, the capacity of people to change and reform, the benefits of supervision, treatment, and program delivery in the community and ultimately the potential this has for the protection of the community in reducing recidivism.

When considering eligibility for parole this purpose must be weighed against the risk each prisoner may pose to members of the community if released to serve the remainder of their sentence amongst them, the ability to remove or mitigate that risk by the imposition of appropriate conditions and understanding the victim’s “voice” and the desire to continue to punish for the criminal wrongdoing.

Consideration:

The applicant’s offending was conducted against his then partner and included over time the acts of punching her to the face, choking her and culminated with dousing her with petrol and igniting it.

Whilst the applicant has no relevant criminal history he was aged in his forties at the time of his offending and ought to have had sufficient maturity to recognise the gravity of his actions and to have controlled his violent and aggressive impulses.  It is a terrible irony that a person can profess to love another and yet be capable of causing them such degradation and harm.

Complicit in his behaviour was the applicant’s intoxication at the times he assaulted his victim.

The applicant has demonstrated sustained compliant and respectful behaviour whilst serving his custodial sentence.  He is accommodated in the O’Hara cottages and has engaged in therapeutic programs aimed to address his offending behaviour.  Specifically, the applicant has completed the Equips domestic abuse group and Gottawanna as well as engaging in vocational courses including a certificate II in Horticulture.  The exit report from the Equips program reflects that whilst the applicant was engaged in the program content he would benefit from further intervention to gain a better insight and understanding of what repeatedly got him to the point of violence with his victim.  The Family Violence Intervention Program has not been available to the applicant whilst incarcerated.  Accessing such intervention can form part of his supervision whilst in the community on parole.

As a trusted inmate the applicant has been able to utilise s42 leave to work in the gardens at Government House and beside an aged issue of an assault involving another inmate in mid 2018 the applicant has not breached the rules and regulations of the prison.

Suitable accommodation is available for him during the parole period.

The applicant is the father of a daughter and the re-establishment of their relationship is a significant motivation for him.  At hearing the applicant presented as future focused.  Aside from rebuilding the relationship with his daughter he aimed to pursue employment including assisting on his family farm and exploring possibilities in the transport sector.

Given the seriousness of the applicant’s criminal conduct against his former partner, the lack of any relevant prior criminal history and concerns regarding the applicant’s insight into his offending an assessment and report was sought from Ms Washington, psychologist so that the risks posed by the applicant were he to be released back into the community could be better understood.

In her report of the 20^th of August 2021 Ms Washington noted the applicant to be of low risk in relation to future management factors.  She opined that whilst his degree of insight into his offending has been considered deficient his engagement with programs has been appropriate and his continued engagement with programs once he returns to the community needed to be encouraged.  Whilst unstable relationships, communication difficulties, alcohol use, poor coping skills and aggression present as risk factors there are protective factors against further offending.  These include good family connections, employment, a future focus and reconnection with his daughter.  Considering the role of alcohol in the offending behaviour the applicant will require ongoing support to avoid future alcohol misuse.  At hearing the applicant asserted his intention as being not to return to drinking alcohol at all.

The applicant’s violent conduct has left in its wake a victim who has lived through the fear and pain associated with the applicant’s acts of violence against her including the multiple surgeries required for her burns, and who will be left with the physical and mental scars of what was done to her.  The Board is mindful of her distress when considering the applicant’s suitability for a parole order.  The community is however better served by ensuring that the applicant accesses the supports necessary to reduce the risk that he will ever act in this way again. In affording him parole the applicant will be supervised and as part of his management his engagement in further therapeutic work will be required including work aimed at furthering his insight into offending actions, equipping him with further tools to avoid a repeat of those actions and supporting him in remaining alcohol abstinent. The applicant’s capacity to strictly comply with the conditions of a parole order is reflected in the compliant manner in which he has served his sentence.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Electronic monitoring
• Excluded from various named locations in southern Tasmania
• Not to contact the victim to his offending directly or indirectly

Paroled from 14 September 2021 - 18 June 2025